Doru Costache - The Church and the World in the Letter to Diognetus

7/31/2019 Doru Costache - The Church and the World in the Letter to Diognetus

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/doru-costache-the-church-and-the-world-in-the-letter-to-diognetus 1/14

( Phronema 27:1 (2012) 29-50)

CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD IN THE LETTER TO

DIOGNETUS : INFERENCES FOR CONTEMPORARYECCLESIAL EXPERIENCE

Doru Costache

Abstract: The author explores chapters five and six of the Letter to Diognetus for a traditional alternative to the problematic attitudesregarding secular society that occur in contemporary Christianity. Thushe reiterates the challenge launched by Marrou more than sixty yearsago, which is to infer from the Letter – beyond its immediate import for early Christians – guidelines for the contemporary ecclesial experience.The article addresses the immediate context and character of the text,

progressing to an analysis of the two chapters, and ends by highlightingthe relevance of this information for contemporary Christianity. Thearticle adds to current Diognetian studies by identifying as yet ignoredtraces of it in later Christian literature.

he variances between Late Antiquity and secular society notwithstanding,the challenges entailed by the Christian experience within the world of

today do not differ significantly from those faced by the earliest Christiangenerations. This is what makes the latters’ perceptions relevant to us and,indeed, their wisdom still inspires solutions for contemporary impasses.One such issue, discussed below, is the possibility of adopting a genuinelyChristian lifestyle within the secular city. Given the contradictoryChristian attitudes toward the secular framework, oscillating between its

overall rejection and its uncritical acceptance, this possibility seems remote. Suchtendencies will not constitute, however, the object of the following analysis. Instead,given that it addressed similar concerns,1 herein I shall explore the Letter

……….30……….

to Diognetus, an apologetic tract whose fifth and sixth chapters treat the challengingcondition of Christians in society and their divine assignment as contributors to thegeneral wellbeing.

Whilst recent studies, like Judith Lieu’s article,2 highlight the significance of thetwo chapters for the identity of early Christians, my goal is to show the relevance of their wisdom for today. In the process, I shall apply a corrective to Lieu’s notion of aChristian ‘meta-identity’ construed as culturally inclusive, because Diognetus (as thetext will be referred to hereafter) points to a theological identity that transcendscultural categories. That said, although I shall often refer to Ioan Ică Jr.’s analysis3 of Christianity’s failure to implement the Diognetian program, my interests do notcoincide with his. After his meticulous diachronic enquiry, Ică discussed aspects

pertaining to an institutional integration of Christianity and society within the new

T



Europe; my article will focus instead on the personal level and the implementation of the Christian ethos in the everyday life. Without an existential assimilation of theDiognetian project, no establishment, like the historic utopias analysed by Ică, seemscapable to withstand the pressure of circumstantial vicissitudes. This does not meanthat I prefer some disembodied version of the Christian ethos. Whilst addressing the

existential dimension I will prove the unhistorical utopia of Abraham van de Beek 4

as parallel to the ideals espoused by Diognetus. Indeed, the latter’s message does notshare either the patterns of a pluralistic society which never actually came into being 5 or the evasionist solution proposed by van de Beek, who pictured a Christiancommunity dwelling outside of time and space. 6 Apart from his courageousdenouncement of the secular fundamentalism of our times, the Christian ethosdepicted by him is not that of Diognetus.

In addressing this topic, I pay tribute to the greatest interpreter of Diognetus inthe last century, Henri-Irénée Marrou, 7 who both highlighted its relevance tocontemporary circumstances and invited further reflection upon its worth. In thecourse of this analysis, I shall point to some similarities between Diognetus and other

patristic texts, which show that – contrary to what is believed – this enigmatic writingwas not totally

……….31……….

forgotten within tradition. Its traces can be discerned in the Macarian Homilies and, possibly, in the Ladder of St John Climacus.

A Context to the Letter to Diognetus

Early Christians faced challenges that were related to their own specificity and/or identity. Construing themselves as bearers of divine wisdom, in the Pauline sense (1Corinthians 1:20-24), and as citizens of God’s kingdom, Christians refusedassimilation with both Jews and the Gentiles (cf. Galatians 3:28) and consequentlywere perceived from the outset as foreigners. As a matter of fact they (re)presentedthemselves, in the words of Diognetus, as a ‘new race or way of life’8 which was notdefined by blood, culture and ethnicity, embracing therefore the status of a thirdnation or race, so counted after Jews and Gentiles. The phrase ‘third nation,’ whilstmissing from the writing of interest here, appears both in the Apology of Aristides andthe apocryphal Peter’s Message;9 in all likelihood the Message being a commonsource for Aristides and Diognetus.10 As such, Christians started to be seen not just asdifferent but also as a challenge to the establishment and to everyone, both Jews and

the Gentiles.

11

Innumerable martyrs have answered for this perception with their ownlives. Others, like the apologists, jeopardised their career and social standing bywriting in defence of their co-religionists. Diognetus, to which I now turn, is ahistorical witness of this attitude, where we find a complex understanding of the ‘newrace’ as both foreign and immanent to any given context.

This anonymous work whose critical edition is still in the making,12 is in fact anaddress or exhortation, and not an epistle. It belongs to the apologetic genre, 13 andwas supposedly drafted in the second half of the second century or early thirdcentury.14 According to contemporary scholars, later Christian tradition did not knowof this anonymous work. For example, Ehrman stated that the Letter was ‘never mentioned, let alone cited, by any of the church Fathers.’15 Although I agree with the

lack of references to this writing, I contest the opinion of a total ignorance toward Diognetus on grounds of the striking similarities between its discourse



……….32……….

in chapters 5 and 6, of immediate interest here, and the Fifth Spiritual Homily attributed to St Macarius.16 This will be discussed below. In the only manuscript ever

found of this writing, apparently from the thirteenth century, the ten genuine chapters(followed by two more chapters, added from a homily on the revelation of God’s Sonand the paradise narrative in Genesis 2)17 address the crucial question of how tocommunicate the Christian message to outsiders. The manuscript was discovered in1436 and published in 1592.18

Diognetus is a polemical text aiming to defend Christianity against falseaccusations, together with denouncing the decadence of heathen culture and the sterile

practices of contemporary Judaism.19 Its goal was to persuade the recipient, a certainDiognetus, to become a Christian. According to the suggestions contained in the text,the recipient, very likely a pagan interested in Christianity (if not a fictionalcharacter),20 was still sensible to the various accusations formulated against Christians

by default. To dismantle his misrepresentations of the Christian faith and lifestyle, theauthor of the tract, known to posterity as Μαθητής (the Disciple), undertook toconvince him otherwise. The full extent of the argument – though very learned andinstructive,21 and inspirational at times – is not of interest here. Nevertheless, twochapters in Diognetus are of particular relevance to our topic, namely the fifth and thesixth.22 These chapters constitute a coherent unity, the first stressing the paradoxicalstate of Christians living within a pagan world, whereas the second points out the

providential role played by them in the midst of society. In the following pages, Ishall consider in more detail the two chapters, looking for the articulation of theChristian lifestyle as presented therein.

In the world, but not of this world

The heading of this section paraphrases a sentence from chapter six, whichencapsulates the genial perception of the author regarding the Christian condition:‘Christians dwell in the world (ἐν κόσµῳ) but are not of the world (ἐκ τοῦ κόσµου).’23 Depicted with both prudence and boldness, the Christian lifestyle or polity 24 constitutes the central theme of the chapters

……….33……….

under consideration here. The Disciple seemingly attempted to forestall the pagan

allegations that Christians were anti-social,

25

by eventually emphasising thesuperiority of the latters’ ethos to pagan beliefs and customs. From the onset, indeed,the author pointed out how Christians are not automatically and indiscriminatelyagainst the world, the broader society or contemporary culture. We read thatChristians do not cultivate the fact of being different – at least regarding the externalaspects of their lives. In the author’s own words,

Christians 26 do not differ (διακεκριµένοι) from the rest of people by place, or language, or their habits.27 For nowhere do they dwell in cities of their own, nor dothey employ some unusual language, nor do they practice a strange lifestyle (βίον παράσηµον).28

Apart from the terminological variances, the fifth Macarian homily reiteratesthe idea of the above passage: ‘the difference (ἀλλοίωσις) of Christians does not



consist in outward (ἐξωτέροις) forms and signs.’29 The sentence brings to further clarity the opening assertion of the same homily, which echoes Diognetus even more:‘The world of Christians is different (ἕτερος), and their behaviour (διαγωγή), mindset( νοῦς), manner of speech (λόγος), and action (πράξις), happen to be different [to thoseof worldly people].’30 The only divergences from Diognetus occur in the theme of a

different ‘world of Christians’ (ὁ τῶν Χριστιανῶν κόσµος ἕτερός ἐστι), a phrasewhich in light of the ensuing specifications refers to ethos, and the idea of a different‘manner of speech,’ which should be taken as a distinguished use of language. Theauthor of the homily meant that both Christian discourse and behaviour illustrate ‘the

peace of Christ,’ ‘the love of the Spirit’ and a state of serenity (ἀταραξίαν) or independence from worldly worries,31 indeed aspects that cannot be reduced to‘outward forms and signs.’ Interestingly, the problematic discussed by Diognetus, of the relationship between Christians and the heathen world was transformed by theMacarian homilies into a comparison between true and false Christians. Beinginfluenced by the worldly mind, the latter are obsessed with external forms.32 Thisapproach evokes the stances against religious formalism in Diognetus 4.1.33

……….34……….

Returning to Diognetus, we read that as ‘followers of the customs’ pertaining tothe countries of their dwelling,34 Christians participate in all the outward aspects of everyday life together with their heathen compatriots. Contrary to the pagansuspicions of separationist propensities, reiterated by van de Beek’s interpretation of the letter as promoting a radically decontextualised Christian ethos,35 the phrase‘followers of the customs’ and the accompanying examples (cf. Diognetus 5.1-2)

prove that Christians belong to the broader social context; their immanence as it were.Christians maintain their lifestyle without evading society, irrespective of howdecadent the latter might be. More a school or community than a religion,36 Christiansare therefore not une secte excentrique, as Marrou noted.37 Similarly, Lieu observedcorrectly: ‘Social separation is not a Christian characteristic.’38 Looking for refugeoutside the world could not be an option for a militant Church, whose purpose inhistory is to change the stone heart of humankind into a living one, as posited byClement the Alexandrian39 a little later, if not in the very time of the Disciple. Whatmatters here is that Christians do not manifest their difference or their ‘supernaturallife’40 in an ostentatious fashion. Christian godliness remains unseen (ἀόρατος δὲ αὐτῶν ἡ θεοσέβεια µένει),41 hidden like the soul within a body; religion is first andforemost an interiorised commitment to Christ. I shall return to this metaphor in the

next section.On this note, let us consider more closely the characteristics of the Christianlifestyle. The Disciple noted:

Whilst living both in Greek and barbarian cities, depending on their lot, andfollowing the local customs in regards to clothing, food and the other aspects of life,they [i.e. Christians] display, however, an astonishing and admittedly paradoxical(θαυµαστὴν καὶ ὁµολογουµένως παράδοξον) condition of their way of life (τὴν κατάστασιν τῆς ἑαυτῶν πολιτείας).42

From this point onwards, the Disciple built an antithesis between Christian behaviour and its heathen counterpart. We can still see in the above citation that whatdifferentiates Christians from pagans is not the external features. Nevertheless, theauthor made no compromise regarding the uniqueness of the Christian polity, the



spirit motivating it and its uncommon traits. Lieu discerned in this context twonuances entailed by the notion of politeia,

……….35……….

which she believed could be considered as foundational for identity. More precisely,there is the ‘internal self-identity, clearly defined and separate’ of Christians and the‘external, observed identity,’ characterised by ‘a lack of visible differentiation,’ bothaspects contributing toward a ‘highly articulated meta-identity.’ 43 She further

proposed that in its complex makeup within which one could trace elements pertaining to earlier cultural backgrounds, this meta-identity would prove that theusual view of Christian distinctiveness as excluding ‘earlier dichotomies’ like Jew vs.Gentile,44 does not stand as such. Although I agree partially with this assertion, I

believe that Lieu’s appraisal of Diognetus illustrates more our contemporarymentality than a conscious effort on the part of its anonymous author. Labouringtowards convincing his interlocutor of the superiority of the Christian ethos over its

counterparts, the Disciple could not have left room for inclusivism. To apply theconcept of meta-identity here would require therefore defining it from the zenithal

point of the notion of transcendence and not along the lines of contemporaryinclusivism, as we shall see immediately.

For the Disciple, the main difference between Christians and irreligious peopleconsisted in the fact that, whilst the pagan lifestyle fleshed out ‘the thought andreflection of people burdened with many worries,’ the Christian mentality did notdraw upon ‘human opinion.’45 A similar antithesis referred to Christian godliness andthe ‘idle pursuit and arrogance of the Jews.’46 There is no inclusivism here. Again,this perception was later rehearsed by the Macarian homilies, which contrasted ‘thewhole race of humankind’ and its ‘vain thoughts’ to Christians who, driven by their

participation in the Spirit (διὰ τὴν µετουσίαν καὶ µετοχὴν τοῦ Πνεύµατος τοῦ ἁγίου),‘dwell in a heavenly mindset’ (ἐν τῷ οὐρανίῳ φρωνήµατι τυγχάνειν).47 Regarding thesource of this wisdom, the Disciple would have pointed to the Logos of God, like in

Diognetus 7.1-2,48 but the idea remains the same. Given this divine term of reference,one could not expect therefore to learn from irreligious people about Christians and

particularly ‘the mystery of their specific godliness’ (τὸ δὲ τῆς ἰδίας αὐτῶν θεοσεβείας µυστήριον),49 as stated at the end of chapter four. What matters here isthat, being at variance with the spirit of this world, Christian polity is

……….36……….

theological in nature, and that it participates in the transcendent character of divinewisdom. Thence the paradox: although Christians are geographically and historicallylocalised, their mindset and lifestyle are never bound by the categories of space, time,ethnicity, culture and language. They are a new race, entirely remade by the creator and saviour of the universe,50 and thus not of this world. Existentially free, no matter how strange this might sound today, they are above any narrow frame of reference,like God himself; they are atopical and cosmopolitan. This understanding is famouslysummarised by an Athonite adage, which goes like this: ‘what matters is not the

place; it is the manner.’ Crucified between heaven and earth, Christians transcend thehere and now, their immediate context. Possibly alluding to this Athonite wisdom, Ică

observed with reference to Diognetus:



The difference between them [i.e., Christians] and the world rests on modality and noton spatiality or temporality; therefore it depends on the tropos not on the topos or thechronos. Christians are neither elsewhere nor in another time; they do not actualisetheir status of God’s children through grace either beyond here or in the future, but inthe here and now, although behaving in a different way than all others.51

The Disciple pointed this out emphatically.

Although living in their countries, they are like foreigners (πάροικοι); they participatein everything as citizens (πολῖται) but endure all things as strangers (ξένοι). Anyforeign country is theirs (πᾶσα ξένη πατρίς ἐστιν αὐτῶν) and for them any homelandis foreign (πᾶσα πατρὶς ξένη).52

This status of to-be-there-but-not-to-belong-anywhere, a paradox of non-localisation characteristic to the Christian journey, echoes the words of the Lord inJohn 17:14-16 and other scriptural passages, as pointed out by Florovsky and Lieu. 53 In turn, Tanner saw behind this paradox allusions to the Stoic ‘universal worldsociety’ and the Epicurean need to ‘live in hiding.’ 54 Whether biblical or

philosophical in origin, or rather both, this depiction points to a dramatic tension thatis best captured by the following statement: Christians ‘reside on earth but their polityis in heaven (ἐν οὐρανῷ πολιτεύονται).’55 This statement should not be considered interms of some evasionist propensities, as discussed above. Somehow

……….37……….

sharing in God’s own perplexing state of being everywhere though never bound byspace, Christians exhibit their strangeness through their different lifestyle in the here

and now. Marrou rendered this aspect in penetrating words: La situation desChrétiens dans le monde implique une synthèse d’immanence et de transcendence (‘the status of Christians in the world entails a synthesis of immanence andtranscendence’). 56 The Disciple exemplified this paradoxical experience byreasserting the dissimilarity in practical terms that evoked the common charges of immorality levelled against Christians. ‘Dwelling in the flesh but not living accordingto the flesh’ (ἐν σαρκὶ τυγχάνουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ κατὰ σάρκα ζῶσιν),57 Christians marry(γαµοῦσιν) and have children (τεκνογονοῦσιν) like all do yet they neither destroytheir offspring58 nor share their spouses.59 In other words, the proximity of the worldand the sharing in the natural rhythms of life do not preclude Christians from fullyaffirming their identity – despite their being misunderstood, marginalised or even

persecuted and put to death.60

Danger and repression could not make legitimate either the abandonment of the Christian lifestyle – which in our own time would take theform of surrendering to secularism – or the evasionist tendencies and pleas for civilrights, as we see in van de Beek’s article.61 For Diognetus, Christian identity isinextricably linked to martyrdom.

The likeness to God implied by the text is not reducible however to the aspectof strangeness. The Disciple continued by pointing out that Christians contribute tothe wellbeing of the world precisely given their ‘transcendence’ to the worldly ways.In fact, and furthermore, not only do they abide by the laws but by their conduct andcompassion for all, through which they resemble God,62 they surpass ( νικῶσι, lit.vanquish) any law.63 It is unfortunate that when addressing the theme of Christians

exceeding pagan standards, Lieu64 referred only to Diognetus 5.7 and contended thatChristian virtues, and the idea of a heavenly politeia, would draw on their Jewish



counterparts. This point clarifies her earlier intimation of the inclusive character of theChristian meta-identity: she intended to say that the Christian lifestyle was neither asnew nor as paradoxical as the author of Diognetus wanted the reader to believe, andthat Judaism should not be discarded as a root of this lifestyle. It is obvious thatChristianity cannot

……….38……….

claim absolute novelty; the early apologists often noticed the continuity betweenworthwhile aspects of humanity’s pre-Christian experience and the Christianrenovation of the values.65 Very likely, the author highlighted the superior lifestyle of Christians in order to reach out to Diognetus and convince him to embraceChristianity; one should not overlook the exhortatory nature of the writing. That said,one cannot understand how Lieu missed the manifestation of love and compassion asconcrete marks of the Christian experience, so emphatically affirmed by Diognetus:Christians ‘love everybody (ἀγαπῶσι πάντας) and are persecuted by all,’ ‘they do

good (ἀγαθοποιούντες) and are punished as evildoers.’66 These assertions reached aclimax in the portrait – Hellenistic, yes, but no less Christian – of the benefactor as

becoming a god for those that receive alms (θεὸς γίνεται τῶν λαµβανόντων) and as animitator of God (µιµητής ἐστι θεοῦ). 67 Symptomatically, the words love andcompassion are nowhere to be found in Lieu’s article. This absence may further explain why she found obscurity and ambiguities, the signs of a forgery,68 in theDiognetian articulation of Christian ‘self-identity.’

Of interest here is the fact that, hated by the world as the flesh hates the soul,and being challenged by their nearness to irreligious people, Christians have theopportunity to progress spiritually – like the soul that betters (βελτιοῦται) itself bytaking the ascetic path69 – and manifest the superiority of their lifestyle to the ethos of the secular city. For the Disciple, the clear sign of this progress was the increase innumbers of Christians, in spite of all adversity.70 These notes lead into the next topicconcerning the Christian task in the world. Before moving any further it is noteworthythat Christian identity as presented by Diognetus cannot be dissociated from what isusually called mystical theology, a view of things which, far from attempting to makesense of God in human terms, undertakes to interpret human life in the light of God.By establishing this transcendent frame of reference for the ecclesial experience,which makes it recognisable beyond its fleeting forms in history, the Diognetian

portrait of the Christian remains relevant through the centuries.

……….39……….The soul of this world

Apart from the paradoxical statements considered above, Diognetus addresses therelationship between Christians and their context through a psychosomatic analogy,which Marrou considered as unique in early Christian literature.71 For the Disciple,‘in the world, Christians are what the soul is in the body’ (ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἐν σώµατι ψυχή,τοῦτ᾽ εἰσὶν ἐν κόσµῳ Χριστιανοί).72 This analogy is contemplated in two ways. First,there is a negative meaning associated with it, which will emerge soon after thefollowing notes on presence and difference. Since they inhabit many places – lit.cities, πόλεις – around the world, Christians are geographically everywhere as the

soul wholly pervades – ἔσπαρται, ‘is scattered into’ – the body.73

Whilst continuingwith the analogy, the Disciple rehearsed ideas better illustrated by the fifth chapter,



namely, of difference and strangeness, which relate to the virtuous and compassionatedrives of Christians. Just as a soul cannot be confounded with its own body, they donot indistinctively merge with the world in which they live: ‘Christians inhabit theworld but are not of the world.’74 Despite their vicinity therefore, the differenceremains. Here the theme of strangeness emerges more dramatically than before. The

Disciple borrowed a Pythagorean-Platonic stance, of the soul scattered and heldcaptive in the body,75 to assert that Christians are in the world as if arrested(κατέχονται) in a ward (ὡς ἐν φρουρᾷ).76 This gloomy perception was certainlymotivated by the spectre of pagan persecutions – a reality suggested by the metaphor of ‘the body [that] hates and makes war to the soul.’ The Disciple also attested thisopenly, ‘the world hates Christians’77 and ‘Christians are persecuted everyday.’78 Second, there is a positive connotation associated with this analogy. Christians are thesoul of the world by fulfilling a similar function in regards to the broader society.More precisely, as the body receives life from the soul, Christians give life to, andliterally preserve, the world (αὐτοὶ δὲ συνέχουσι τὸν κόσµον).79 This statement bringsto clarity an earlier assertion concerning Christians who, their poverty

notwithstanding, can enrich many.80 The dialectic of the soul which remains differentfrom, yet active within the body, brings to culmination the paradox of the Christianlife as contemplated in chapter five, an aspect captured by Ică.

……….40……….

The paradoxical citizenship of Christians unifies therefore within the cruciform figureof an antinomy, the interior and the exterior, the vertical and the horizontal,transcendence and immanence, heaven and earth, contemplation and action, mystical[vision] and [practical] involvement. The psychophysical image points out with claritythe impossibility of all disjunctive and unilateral options, which are equally ‘heretical’

and mutilating.81

Operating within a holistic framework, the Disciple transformed the pessimisticconcept of imprisonment by acknowledging the active role of both the soul in the

body and of Christians in society. Marrou highlighted this positive reinterpretation byshowing that Christians act in the world like a divine principle or a providentialfactor.82 More precisely, Christians appear comme l’équivalent d’une âme cosmique (‘like the equivalent of a cosmic soul’).83 This vivifying function entails two morenuances.

First, when speaking of the role of Christians as eco-systemic agents who preserve the world, a task assigned by God,84 Diognetus seems to suggest a mystical

influence exercised by their being there. Their presence infuses life into the body of the world; they sustain the cosmos in existence and, one would say, bless it throughtheir immanence, as illustrated by the saying ‘the human being sanctifies the place’from the Romanian unwritten lore. This holy function appears, interestingly, like aspecial case of the participatory variant of the strong anthropic principle, which

postulates the ontological function of human presence in the universe.85 What mattersis that reverberations of the phrase αὐτοὶ δὲ συνέχουσι τὸν κόσµον occurred, insimilar words, in St John Climacus, who perceived the ‘energy’ of prayer as the‘support of the world’ (κόσµου σύστασις).86 Could this be another patristic echo of

Diognetus, alongside the Macarian homilies, or does it reflect a general understandingof the Christian presence in the world – better illustrated for example by the saintlyexamples of the Spiritual Meadow – which the Letter happened to encapsulate in suchvibrant tones? Given the scarce information at our disposal, it is difficult to answer.



Without providing details and without connecting this theme with Climacus, Ică maintained that a clear understanding of Christians as preventing the destruction of the world through their prayers appeared in St Justin Martyr’s Second Apology 7.1,and that in the fourth century the

……….41……….

theme was rehearsed in a narrower sense, as the prayer of the monks, in a letter by StSerapion of Thmuis.87

Nevertheless, and in a second instance, this comparison with the views of Climacus (which although spiritual in nature are not as mystical as the inferenceconcerning the impact of the Christian presence in the world) leads to a more practicalaspect of the mission appointed to Christians. This task is termed as love for the worldor literally compassion for ‘those that hate them.’88 It is through love that Christianscounteract the destructive factor represented by hatred, and thus they accomplish their divinely-assigned mission, from which they do not dare resign.89 This sense of duty

makes them God’s conscious and active agents in the world. The mystical dimensiondoes not exclude therefore a practical side of Christian immanence, which justifiesIcă’s observation that in light of Diognetus 6 the aim of the whole Christianundertaking is the establishment of a ‘Kingdom of God which is both an inner realityand a socio-cosmic one.’90

Here, chapter six meets the final idea expounded by the fifth one, and both seemto anticipate the change of heart of the Empire regarding Christians, which occurredin the early fourth century. 91 Together with their new status, the presence of Christians and their activity were construed as quintessential to the consolidation of the State. Ică observed that this shift was not without downturns, and that both Eastand West failed the Diognetian project by causing a schism between mundaneactivities and the spiritual life.92 The project remains therefore a sacred task – whichcannot be completed without historical realism, like in the assertions of van deBeek.93 Nevertheless, given the failure of all institutional attempts to implement this

program, in light of the Disciple’s wisdom the most suitable approach would be toaddress the co-existence of Christians and the broader society, on a personal level.

Concluding remarks

The Letter to Diognetus addresses aspects of the ecclesial experience, painting aChristian’s portrait that is relevant irrespective of time and space. Thus, it representsan important source for the rediscovery of true ecclesial

……….42……….

specificity, mainly regarding the complex interactions of the Church and its broader context. Marrou94 believed that the image of Christians as the soul of a body is notonly fortunate and expressive; it is more so fecund and inspirational.

The nuanced approach of the Disciple entailed a conundrum: if Christians aredifferent to this world, what could they do to preserve their identity? Furthermore, inkeeping their identity intact, how would they properly interact with the world?Immune to the dichotomies opposing mundane activities and the spiritual life – withthe downgrading of the former and the idealisation of the latter – the Disciple

proposed an alternative that was both holistic and paradoxical. In it there can bediscerned scriptural and philosophical echoes yet it ultimately built on the paradigm



of the incarnation, an aspect treated here only implicitly. This alternative, whichconsisted in the appraisal of Christians as agents of the crucified Logos, can besummed up as follows: apart from being different, they are never against the worldeven though the world is against them. What empowers them is the Christlikeembrace of their paradoxical condition, of living in a given context without

exclusively belonging to it. Only thus, lovingly, can they undertake the next step – of becoming active contributors to the spiritual health and wellbeing of the world. After centuries of Christendom, contemporary Christians face similar dilemmas, which theyattempt to address either by evading society or by assimilation. It is these specificcircumstances that should bring this writing to our attention, more than had been thecase in earlier generations. However, although Diognetus offers viable solutions toour impasses, their implementation is impossible without further nuancing the entire

problematic95 and without the awareness that Christianity is after all an interiorisedcommitment to Christ.

There is nothing ‘remarkably opaque,’ as Lieu insisted,96 in the genuinelyapostolic insight of the Disciple, an insight touching on the very essence of the

Christian mindset, which ‘solves’ its paradoxes not by simplifications but through thecruciform wisdom evoked by Ică. This approach should be brought back to the heartof the Christian mission and pastoral work.

……….43……….

Acknowledgments

I express my gratitude to the two Phronema reviewers for their insightful recommendations,to Fr Bogdan Bucur and Fr Cristian Câdă for kindly facilitating the access to sources thatwere beyond my reach, and to Mario Baghos and Dimitri Kepreotes for their pertinentstylistic suggestions.

NOTES:

Revd Doru Costache received his Doctor of Theology degree from the University of Bucharest, in2000. He is a Presbyter under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia and a Senior Lecturer inPatristics at St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College, Sydney. His research interests are intraditional/patristic theology, transdisciplinarity and the dialogue of science and theology. Currently,he undertakes an interpretation of Genesis 1 within tradition and in the light of contemporarychallenges. 1 Ioan I. Ică Jr., ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire în R ăsărit, în Occident şi în Europa de azi,’ in GândireaSocial ă a Bisericii: Fundamente, Documente, Analize, Perspective, ed. Ioan I. Ică Jr. and GermanoMarani (Sibiu: Deisis, 2002): 17-54, esp. 19.2 Judith M. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity and the Letter to Diognetus,’ in Neither Jew nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity (London: T&T Clark, 2002): 171-89.

3 Cf. n.1 above.



4 Abraham van de Beek, ‘Every Foreign Land Is Their Native Country, and Every Land of Birth Is aLand of Strangers: Ad Diognetum 5,’ Journal of Reformed Theology 1 (2007): 178-94.5 Cf. ibid, 179-81, 191-94.6 Cf. ibid, 187-91.7 Cf. Henri-Irénée Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ in À Diognète, intro., éd. critique, trad. et comment. de

Henri-Irénée Marrou, Sources Chrétiennes 33 (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1951), 87-268, esp. 174-76.8 Cf. Diognetus 1. When not otherwise indicated, the edition used herein is The Apostolic Fathers, vol.2, ed. and trans. Bart D. Ehrman, Loeb Classical Library 25 (Cambridge and London: HarvardUniversity Press, 2003), 131-59, here 130-31.9 Cf. Richard Norris, ‘The Apologists,’ in The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, ed.Frances Young, Lewis Ayres and Andrew Louth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004): 36-44, esp. 37-38. See also

……….44……….

Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 183-84, 186; Johannes Quasten, Patrology, vol. 1(Westminster: Christian Classics Inc., 1986), 193. The theme of a gradual process that led to the ‘thirdrace,’ without the phrase being used, seems to have been reiterated by St Gregory the Theologian inOration 31.25 (PG 36, 160D-161B). Nazianzen scholars might be interested in tracing his depiction

back to such earlier sources.10 Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 121, 131-32.11 Diognetus 5.17 (Ehrman, 140). On related aspects, see Ferdinand Christian Baur, The Church

History of the First Three Centuries, vol. 2, trans. Allan Menzies (London and Edinburgh: Williamsand Norgate, 1879), 132-35; Georges Florovsky, ‘Antinomies of Christian History: Empire andDesert,’ in Collected Works vol. 2: Christianity and Culture (Belmont, Mass.: Nordland PublishingCompany, 1974): 67-100, esp. 71-72; W. H. C. Frend, ‘Martyrdom and Political Oppression,’ in The

Early Christian World , vol. 1, ed. Philip F. Esler (London and New York: Routledge, 2000): 815-38;Mark Humphries, Early Christianity (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 196-97; Jeffrey S.Siker, ‘Christianity in the Second and Third Centuries,’ in The Early Christian World , vol. 2, ed. PhilipF. Esler: 231-57.12 See e.g. Pär Sandin, ‘Diognetiana,’ Vigiliae Christianae, 61 (2007): 253-57; R. G. Tanner, ‘TheEpistle to Diognetus and Contemporary Greek Thought,’ Studia Patristica, 15:1 (1984): 495-508, esp.505. Cf. my n.27 below.13 On the apologists, see Baur, The Church History of the First Three Centuries, 137-38; NicoleZeegers-Vander Vorst, ‘Apologists,’ in Jean-Yves Lacoste (ed.), Encyclopedia of Christian Theology ,vol. 1: A-F (New York and London: Routledge, 2005): 73-75; Eric Osborn, ‘The Apologists,’ in The

Early Christian World, ed. Philip F. Esler, vol. 1: 525-51.

14 For more details, see Paul Foster, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ The Expository Times 118:4 (2007):162-68; Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 241-68; Quasten, Patrology, 248-52; Norris, ‘The Apologists,’ 43-44;Zeegers-Vander Vorst, ‘Apologists,’ 73; Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 495-96. See also Bart D.Ehrman, ‘Introduction’ to Epistle to Diognetus, in The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 2 (cited above n.8), 122-29; The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, ed. and revised by Michael W.

Holmes (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1999), 528-31; David Warner, ‘Apostolic Fathers,’ inThe Encyclopedia of Christian Literature, vol. 1: Genres and Types / Biographies A-G, ed. GeorgeThomas Kurian and James D. Smith III (Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2010): 12-16, esp.15-16.

……….45……….

15 Ehrman, ‘Introduction,’ 127. Similarly, Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers, 529; Foster, ‘The Epistle toDiognetus,’ 162, 167.16 Cf. Spiritual Homilies 5.1-4 (PG 34, 493D-497D).17 Cf. Ehrman, ‘Introduction,’ 123-24. Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 98-240; Osborn, ‘The Apologists,’526; Quasten, Patrology, 249-51; Foster, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 163-66.18 On the circumstances of its discovery and publication, see Otto Bardenhewer, Patrology: The Lives

and Works of the Fathers of the Church, trans. from the second edition by Thomas J. Shanan (Freiburgim Breisgau and St Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1908), 68-69; Ehrman, ‘Introduction,’ 127-28; Foster, ‘The



Epistle to Diognetus,’ 162-63; Humphries, Early Christianity, 80; Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’496-97.19 Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 98-118; Sandin, ‘Diognetiana,’ 255; Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’500-1.20 Diognetus 1 (Ehrman, 130-1). See Ehrman, ‘Introduction,’ 126; Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’

498-99.21 Cf. Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 499-500. His entire article discusses the various philosophical echoes within the tract.22 The passages from chapter 5 cited herein are translated under my supervision by a group of studentsof St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College (Sydney), namely, Theodoros Dimitriou,Leonidas Ioannou, William Le Couilliard and Efstratios Makris. The responsibility for the final versionfalls entirely on me; I also translated the relevant passages from other chapters. For a detailed analysisof chapters 5 and 6 see Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 119-76.23 Diognetus 6.3 (Ehrman, 142).24 Diognetus 5.4 (Ehrman, 140). Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 502, rejects the usual translation,‘citizenship.’25 Cf. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 183; Siker, ‘Christianity in the Second and ThirdCenturies,’ 242-49.26 For the use of the term ‘Christian’ in Diognetus , briefly, see David G. Horrell, ‘The LabelΧριστιανός: 1 Peter 4:16 and the Formation of Christian Identity,’ Journal of Biblical Literature, 126:2(2007): 361-81, esp. 361, n.2.

……….46……….

27 Here I followed Ehrman (140), which gives ἔθεσι (customs, habits). I purposely translated it as‘habits,’ which can be taken as both customs and clothes. However, the editions of Holmes (540) andMarrou (62) both read ἔσθεσι (clothes, vestments). It is uncertain why Holmes (541) translated theword as ‘custom.’ Could Holmes’ unwarranted translation have prompted Ehrman’s editorial change or was it by assimilation with Diognetus 5.4 (cf. n.34 below)?28 Diognetus 5.1-2 (Ehrman, 138-39).29 Spiritual Homilies 5.4 (PG 34, 497C).30 Ibid, 5.1 (PG 34, 493D).31 Ibid, 5.4 (PG 34, 497BC).32 See ibid, 5.4 (PG 34, 497C).33 Ehrman, 136.34 Diognetus 5.4 (Ehrman, 138).35 Cf. van de Beek, ‘Every Foreign Land,’ 185-86.36 Cf. Florovsky, ‘Antinomies of Christian History,’ 67; Frances Young, ‘Christian Teaching,’ in TheCambridge History of Early Christian Literature, ed. Young, Ayres and Louth, (cited above n.9): 91-104, esp. 95-96.37 Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 119; cf. 133-34. Similarly, Florovsky, ‘Antinomies of Christian History,’69.38 Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 183.39 See Clement, Exhortation to the Greeks 1: ‘See how mighty is the new song [i.e., the song of theGospel]! It has made men out of stones and men out of beasts.’ Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortationto the Greeks – The Rich Man’s Salvation – To The Newly Baptized , with an English trans. by G. W.Butterworth, Loeb Classical Library 92 (Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2003), 10-11. 40 Cf. Quasten, Patrology, 250.41 Diognetus 6.4 (Ehrman, 142).42 Diognetus 5.4 (Ehrman, 138-40).43 Cf. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 179.

……….47……….

44 Cf. ibid, 187.45

Diognetus 5.3 (Ehrman, 138); cf. 7.1-2 (at 142-45).46 Diognetus 4.6 (Ehrman, 138).47 Cf. Spiritual Homilies 5.4 (PG 34, 497AB).



48 Ehrman, 142, 144.49 Diognetus 4.6 (Ehrman, 138).50 Cf. ibid.51 Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 22 (my translation).52 Diognetus 5.5 (Ehrman, 140).53 Cf. Florovsky, ‘Antinomies of Christian History,’ 68; Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 179-80. On the Pauline affinities of the Letter , see Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 127-28. In his brief list of scriptural elements in Diognetus , Trigg made no mention of the Pauline sources. Cf. Joseph Trigg,‘The Apostolic Fathers and Apologists,’ in A History of Biblical Interpretation, vol. 1: The Ancient

Period, ed. Alan J. Hauser and Duane F. Watson (Grand Rapids and Cambridge: William B. EerdmansPublishing Co., 2003): 304-33, esp. 315.54 Cf. Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 502.55 Diognetus 5.9 (Ehrman, 140). The phrase echoes Philippians 3:20, likewise cited by the Spiritual

Homilies 5.3 (PG 34, 497A), which makes even more obvious the affiliation of these writings.56 Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 134 (my translation). See also Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 21.57 Diognetus 5.8 (Ehrman, 140).58 See Diognetus 5.6 (Ehrman, 140).59 Cf. Diognetus 5.7 (Ehrman, 140).60 Diognetus 5.11-12, 14-17 (Ehrman, 140).61 Cf. van de Beek, ‘Every Foreign Land,’ 192-93.62 Diognetus 5.11 (Ehrman, 140); 10.6 (Ehrman, 152-53). Analysing chapter 10, Tanner, ‘The Epistleto Diognetus,’ 504, ignored compassion as the way

……….48……….

of achieving divine resemblance. On Diognetus 10.6, see Foster, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 166; Ică,‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 21; Norman Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek PatristicTradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 101. For further comments on divine philanthropyand its human imitation, see Juan Ignacio Ruiz Aldas, ‘La recepción del concepto de philanthropía enla literatura cristiana de los dos primeros siglos,’ Scripta Theologica 42:2 (2010): 277-308. The author mentions the passages in Diognetus 8.7 and 9.2 but only regarding God’s love for humankind (278,295-96), ignoring the human emulation of this divine attribute espoused in chapter 10. That said, RuizAldas’ conclusions (303-5) on the equation of Christian love and divine philanthropy in the first twocenturies remain valid.63 Diognetus 5.10 (Ehrman, 140). Cf. Bardenhewer, Patrology, 68; Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 129-30.Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 502-3, noticed here more Stoic echoes.64 Cf. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 180-82.65 Cf. ibid, 174; Norris, ‘The Apologists,’ 36-37; Siker, ‘Christianity in the Second and ThirdCenturies,’ 233; Zeegers-Vander Vorst, ‘Apologists,’ 73-74.66 Diognetus 5.11 and 16 (Ehrman, 140).67 Diognetus 10.6 (Ehrman, 152). Cf. Russell, The Doctrine of Deification, 101.68 Cf. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 171, 189.69 Diognetus 6.9 (Ehrman, 142).70 Ibid. Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 136-37.71 Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 172-73.72 Diognetus 6.1 (Ehrman, 140). Cf. Baur, The Church History of the First Three Centuries, vol. 2,129-31.73 Diognetus 6.2 (Ehrman, 140-42).74 Diognetus 6.3 (Ehrman, 142).75 Cf. Foster, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 165; Tanner, ‘The Epistle to Diognetus,’ 502-3 (againstMarrou’s conclusion that this is a classical Stoic stance). Marrou (op. cit., 146-66) explores a series of more positive Christian antecedents of this theme, in the New Testament, the apologetic tradition andin the early Alexandrines.76 Diognetus 6.7 (Ehrman, 142). Cf. Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 21-22.

……….49……….

77 Diognetus 6.5 (Ehrman, 142).78 Diognetus 6.9 (Ehrman, 142). See the thematic parallel with Romans 8:36, cf. Psalm 44:22 (LXX).



79 Diognetus 6.7 (Ehrman, 142). Cf. Osborn, ‘The Apologists,’ 526.80 Diognetus 5.13 (Ehrman, 140), alluding to 2 Corinthians 6:10. Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 137.81 Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 21 (my translation).82 Cf. Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 138-41, 144-45.83 Ibid, 175 (my translation).84 Diognetus 6.10 (Ehrman, 142-43).85 Cf. John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford and NewYork: Clarendon Press and Oxford University Press, 1986), 22.

86 Cf. Ladder of the Divine Ascent 28 (PG 88, 1129A).87 Cf. Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 21, 25.88 Diognetus 6.6 (Ehrman, 142).89 Diognetus 6.10 (Ehrman, 142).90 Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 19 (my translation); see also 21.91 See G. R. Evans, ‘The Early Church in the World,’ in The First Christian Theologians: An

Introduction to Theology in the Early Church, ed. G. R. Evans, (Carlton: Blackwell Publishers, 2004):58-64; Florovsky, ‘Antinomies of Christian History,’ 72-75. For details from the Christian traditionafter Diognetus , see Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 166-171.

92 Cf. Ică, ‘Biserică, societate şi gândire,’ 24-28.93 Cf. van de Beek, ‘Every Foreign Land,’ 179-82, 187-91.

……….50……….

94 Marrou, ‘Commentaire,’ 174.95 I sketched some relevant aspects elsewhere. See my ‘The Inner Side of the Visible: ApostolicCriteria and Spirit in the Orthodox Tradition,’ in Teodosie Petrescu (ed.), Omagiu Profesorului NicolaeV. Dur ă la 60 de ani (Constanța: Editura Arhiepiscopiei Tomisului, 2006): 386-392.96 Cf. Lieu, ‘The Forging of Christian Identity,’ 182-83.

Doru Costache - The Church and the World in the Letter to Diognetus

Documents

Transcript of Doru Costache - The Church and the World in the Letter to Diognetus